Category Archives: Government

Law & Cyberbullying

<reddit.com/r/vancouver> <the power of reddit>

Dr. Alec Couros AMA (ask me anything) on Reddit re: his experiences with the cat fishing scams <I received a call yesterday, but nobody spoke> <info for romance scam victims>

catfish

What are the root causes of cyberbullying? How do teens react to cyberbullying? What is the role of social media in fostering youth civic engagement and digital citizenship? What are the challenges as youth develop their identities and social relationships both on and offline? <Amanda Todd>

How should teachers react to videos depicting local teen violence? How can teachers empower their students to deal with bullies constructively? When should parents get involved? What is the role of law (e.g., we can’t criminalize those we should protect)? <CTV Vancouver News, Feb 2, 2016>

Have you ever been bullied in your personal or work life? Where you ever the bully? Do you have any stories to share about cyberbullying in your school?<Academic Bullying & Mobbing>

As Shariff (2015) asks, how do we (educators, parents, policy makers, and the legal community) develop create ways to facilitate the growth of digitally empowered children and young adults? What are your recommendations for the development of safe school environments and anti-oppression education (e.g. teacher education in legal, digital, and media literacy; engage youth in policy development; educate the news media; sensitivity training for law enforcement personnel; updates to existing legislation in the Youth Criminal Justice Act)?

How might we strengthen Canada’s laws against cyberbullying? What are the challenges of the WITS (Walk Away, Ignore, Talk it Out, and Seek Help) program that the Canadian government is promoting to reduce cyberbullying?

According to Canadian Law, can children be deemed child pornographers when sexting non-consensual intimate images? What are the negative long and short-term consequences of criminalizing young people?

What are the public’s rights to open courts and press freedoms? Without the ability to pursue legal actions anonymously, will bullied children feel safe to pursue legal action to protect themselves (without fear of revictimization)?

Dr. Jennifer Fraser <why we must refuse to submit to bullying>
Abuse of Power <Teaching Tolerance>
Are you a responsible digital citizen? <A Bullying Story> <Digizen Game>

diff-dig-cit-1-fi

Computer coding added to BC’s K-12 curriculum

At the inaugural BC Tech Summit, Christy Clark,the Premier of British Columbia announced that computer coding will be added to the province’s K-12 school curriculum:
Opening Keynote
www.cbc.ca
www.vancitybuzz.com
www.techvibes.com
www.theglobeandmail.com
www.thestar.com

What are some of the difficult questions concerning BC’s new tech strategy, including: teacher training, backend support, equitable funding for classroom technologies, and the need for government accountability?

What are the complex ethical, technical, and pedagogical issues associated with the development and implementation of BC’s new ADST framework?

How is technology changing the way children think, learn, and focus in school?

How might we increase student voice and choice in the development of new curriculum? For example, consider ISTE (International Society for Technology Education): Student FeedbackStandards for Students (7 Standards; 28 Performance Indicators).

BCIC (British Columbia Innovation Council)

Scratch Coding Curriculum Guide (draft by the Scratch Ed Team)

Computational Thinking (Wing, 2006)

Big ideas on British Columbia’s redesigned curriculum

Ipad

Net Neutrality Is Dead. Here’s How to Get it Back

Craig Aaron, Reader Supported News, January 15, 2014– Three judges in D.C. just killed Net Neutrality.

This could be the end of the Internet as we know it. But it doesn’t have to be.

The big news: A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down the Federal Communications Commission’s Open Internet Order. This decision means that companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon – which brought the lawsuit – are now free to block or slow down any website, application or service they like.

These companies will rush to change the Web and line their own pockets at our expense – creating new tolls for app makers, expensive price tiers for popular sites, and fast lanes open only to the few content providers that can afford them.

It didn’t have to be this way.

The FCC’s rules were designed to prevent Internet service providers from blocking or interfering with Web traffic. Instead of reversing a Bush-era decision that weakened the FCC’s authority over broadband, and establishing solid legal footing, former FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski issued the rules in 2010 under the complicated and shaky legal framework the court rejected today.

The rules the court struck down left much to be desired, but they were a step toward preserving Internet users’ freedom to go wherever they wanted, whenever they wanted.

Now, just as Verizon promised it would in court, the biggest broadband providers will race to turn the open and vibrant Web into something that looks like cable TV – where they pick and choose the channels for you. They’ll establish fast lanes for the few giant companies that can afford to pay exorbitant tolls and reserve the slow lanes for everyone else.

We could pay dearly for the previous FCC’s weak political will and wishy-washy approach. But today’s ruling leaves the door wide open to a better approach. It’s not too late for the FCC to reverse its terrible decisions and repair its doomed strategy.

That’s right. The FCC could make all this go away by simply reading the law correctly and reclaiming the authority it already has to protect Internet users for good. The agency had clear authority before the Bush administration abdicated it and the Obama administration failed to fix the mistake.

New FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler recently stated that the FCC must be able to protect broadband users and preserve the Internet’s fundamental open architecture. Now he has no other choice but to restore and reassert the FCC’s clear authority over our nation’s communications infrastructure….

Together we can fight back against these greedy Internet service providers. We can save the Internet we love. But we have to act now.

Read More: RSN

FBI warns of U.S. government breaches by Anonymous hackers

Jim Finkle & Joseph Menn, Reuters, November 15, 2013– Activist hackers linked to the collective known as Anonymous have secretly accessed U.S. government computers in multiple agencies and stolen sensitive information in a campaign that began almost a year ago, the FBI warned this week.

The hackers exploited a flaw in Adobe Systems Inc’s software to launch a rash of electronic break-ins that began last December, then left “back doors” to return to many of the machines as recently as last month, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said in a memo seen by Reuters.

The memo, distributed on Thursday, described the attacks as “a widespread problem that should be addressed.” It said the breach affected the U.S. Army, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, and perhaps many more agencies.

Investigators are still gathering information on the scope of the cyber campaign, which the authorities believe is continuing. The FBI document tells system administrators what to look for to determine if their systems are compromised.

An FBI spokeswoman declined to elaborate.

According to an internal email from Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz’ chief of staff, Kevin Knobloch, the stolen data included personal information on at least 104,000 employees, contractors, family members and others associated with the Department of Energy, along with information on almost 2,0000 bank accounts.

The email, dated October 11, said officials were “very concerned” that loss of the banking information could lead to thieving attempts.

Officials said the hacking was linked to the case of Lauri Love, a British resident indicted on October 28 for allegedly hacking into computers at the Department of Energy, Army, Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Sentencing Commission and elsewhere.

Investigators believe the attacks began when Love and others took advantage of a security flaw in Adobe’s ColdFusion software, which is used to build websites.

Adobe spokeswoman Heather Edell said she was not familiar with the FBI report. She added that the company has found that the majority of attacks involving its software have exploited programs that were not updated with the latest security patches.

The Anonymous group is an amorphous collective that conducts multiple hacking campaigns at any time, some with a few participants and some with hundreds. In the past, its members have disrupted eBay’s Inc PayPal after it stopped processing donations to the anti-secrecy site Wikileaks. Anonymous has also launched technically more sophisticated attacks against Sony Corp and security firm HBGary Federal.

Some of the breaches and pilfered data in the latest campaign had previously been publicized by people who identify with Anonymous, as part of what the group dubbed “Operation Last Resort.”

Among other things, the campaigners said the operation was in retaliation for overzealous prosecution of hackers, including the lengthy penalties sought for Aaron Swartz, a well-known computer programmer and Internet activist who killed himself before a trial over charges that he illegally downloaded academic journal articles from a digital library known as JSTOR.

Despite the earlier disclosures, “the majority of the intrusions have not yet been made publicly known,” the FBI wrote. “It is unknown exactly how many systems have been compromised, but it is a widespread problem that should be addressed.”

Read More: Reporting by Joseph Menn in San Francisco and Jim Finkle in Boston; Additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici and Alina Selyukh; Editing by Tiffany Wu and Tim Dobbyn.